Pramāṇa · Search · About · API

The Pandyan Kingdom from the Earliest Times to the Sixteenth Century c7: Chapter III. The Pāṇḍyan Kingdom in the Sangam Age

The Pāṇḍyan Kingdom from the Earliest Times to the Sixteenth Century c7

Language
English

Contents

Chapter III. The Pāṇḍyan Kingdom in the Sangam Age

c7.2

THE normal extent of the Pāndyan kingdom in the Sangam Age corresponded to the modern districts of Tinnevelly, Ramnad and Madura, with the southern Vellār for its northern boundary. About twenty names of Pāndyan kings and princes can be gathered from the Sangam works, but it is at present almost impossible to determine their order. Some attempts have been made to work out a continuous political history for this period, the most considerable of them being that of Mr. Kanakasabhai. But there is no doubt that an account like that goes far beyond what the evidence can sustain. We must rest content with gathering the chief facts known about the more important kings and simply narrating them as interesting but isolated events whose exact inter-relation cannot yet be determined. It has been indicated already that none of the kings of the Sangam, except one who is mentioned in the Vēlvikkudi grant as having ruled long before the Kalabhra interregnum, can be identified in the copper plates of the Pāndyas of the First Empire. Nor can the attempt to determine the date of Nakkīrar (a younger contemporary of the Pāndyan hero of Talaiyālangānam), by counting ten generations backward from the date of the king celebrated in the illustrative stanzas of the Iraiyanāraha-porulurai be considered satisfactory.¹

c7.3

¹ See *I. A.*, xxxvii, pp. 193-8; also Dr. S. K. Aiyangār, *Beginnings*, ch vi. He distinguishes two layers in the commentary in its modern form. The reference to pp. 125 and 191 of Mr. C. W. Dāmodaram Pillai's edition by Dr. S. K. Aiyangār (at p. 253) is not easy to follow.

c7.4

The *Maduraikkāñji* refers to two kings as the predecessors of the Neḍuñjeliyan of Talaiyālaṅgānam viz., a Neḍiyōn (l. 61) identified with Vaḍimbalamba Niṇravan by the famous annotator Nacciṉārkkiṉiyar and a Palsālai Mudukuḍumi (l. 759) no doubt the same as the first king of the Vēḷvikkuḍi grant. It is not possible to decide the distance in time between these two kings or between these and the Neḍuñjeliyan of the *Śilappadikāram* known as Ariyappaḍaikadaṇda on the one hand and the other Neḍuñjeliyan who is the hero of the Talaiyālaṅgānam fight and of the *Maduraikkāñji*, as perhaps also of the Neḍunalvāḍai. We proceed to note the outstanding facts about each of these kings recorded in the literature of the age.

c7.5.1

The king referred to as Neḍiyōn or Vaḍimbalamba Niṇravan is an almost mythical figure whose achievements find a place in the ‘Sacred Sports’ of Madura,¹ and also among the traditional achievements of the Pāndyan kings mentioned in general terms in the Vēḷvikkuḍi and Śinnamanūr plates. Mudukuḍumi Peruvaḷudi is a more tangible figure who is praised by three poets in five short poems.² One of them (*Puram* 12) refers to his foreign conquests as the basis of his liberality, and another by the same poet (*Puram* 15) contains a shocking description of the way he treated conquered territory ploughing it with white-mouthed asses and refers to the many big sacrifices he performed in his day. Another poem (*Puram* 6) contains a blessing coupled with extravagant hero-worship which claims all India as the territory ruled by this king. The king who ruled in Madura at the time of the story of the *Śilappadikāram* was a Neḍuñjeḷiyan distinguished by the epithet Ariyappaḍaikaḍanda¹ for reasons that cannot now be traced. He is said to have died of a broken heart when the innocence of Kōvalan was proved to him by Kaṇṇaki beyond all possibility of doubt. There is a short poem (*Puṟam* 183) ascribed to him which puts learning above birth and caste.

c7.5.2

His viceroy at Koṟkai and perhaps his son and successor was another Śeḷiyan, called Veṟri Vēṟ-ceḷiyan or Iḷanjeḷiyan, who wreaked terrible vengeance on the goldsmiths by sacrificing a thousand of them in one day to appease the great goddess who had been Kaṇṇaki.² This occurrence which seems to be historical in substance must be ascribed to about the time of Gajabāhu I of Ceylon, somewhere in the second century A.D. It seems probable that the only other figure that stands out boldly from the rest, the victor of Talaiyālaṅgānam,³ was later than the rulers mentioned in the *Śilappadikāram*. He came to the throne as a youth and early in his reign proved more than equal to a hostile combination of his two neighbouring monarchs aided by five minor chiefs. The decisive engagement took place at Talaiyālaṅgānam which has been, with great plausibility, identified with a village of almost the same name, Talai-Ālam-Kāḍu, eight miles north-west of Tiruvālūr, in the Tanjore District.¹ There exists a simple poem of great force and beauty (*Puram* 72) in which the young king swears an oath of heroism and victory in the ensuing fight which he appears to have amply fulfilled.

c7.5.3

It seems that his enemies took the offensive, greatly underrating the strength of the youthful ruler and hoping for an easy partition of his territory among themselves.² Neḍuñjeḷiyan had to begin his fights almost at the gates of Madura (*Aham* 116) and pursue his foes up to the scene of the decisive engagement in the Tanjore District. It must have been in this campaign that Māndaram Chēral Irumporai, the son of the Chera King of the Elephant-look must have been captured alive, as is seen from *Puram* 17, in literal fulfilment of Neḍuñjeḷiyan's vow referred to above (*Puram* 72). After thus surmounting his initial difficulties in the defensive war that was forced on him by his jealous and aggressive neighbours, Neḍuñjeḷiyan appears to have taken the offensive in his turn and won substantial successes against his foes. Two separate campaigns seem to be mentioned, one against the Kongu chief, an Adigan, the chief event of the war being an engagement in a place somewhere near Uṟaiyūr;³ and another against the Nīdūr chieftain Evvi which resulted in the annexation to the Pāndyan kingdom of the Miḷalaikkūṟram and the Muttūṟrukkūṟram, apparently territories in the modern district of Tanjore.⁴ That this king was a follower of Brahminical Hinduism is clear from the reference to a vedic sacrifice performed by him with the assistance of Brahmins learned in the Vedas.

c7.5.4

Himself evidently a poet of no small merit, this king appears to have been also a great patron of the poets and is celebrated in the songs of many of them including Māṅguḍi Marudan, Nakkīrar and his father, Paraṇar and Kallāḍanār.

c7.6

¹ See Nambi's *Tiruvilaiyāḍal*, No. 21.

c7.7

² Neṭṭimaiyār, *Puram* 9, 12, 15; Neḍumpalliyattaṉār, *Puram* 64 and Kārikilār *Puram* 6.

c7.8

¹ See end of *Maduraikkāṇḍam*, Kaṭṭurai, ll. 14-18.

c7.9

² *Śilappadikāram*, canto 27, ll. 127 ff.

c7.10

³ There are numerous references to this king and it will be well to bring them together here. Kallāḍanār in *Puṟam* 23, 25, 371; Iḍaikkunṟūr Kiḷār in same Nos. 76 to 79 all referring to the great victory of the reign and No. 76 giving also the alternative name of the king Paśumpūtpāṇḍiyan; Kuḍapulaviyanār in *Puṟam* 18 and 19; Paraṇar in *Aham* 116, 162 and *Kuṟuntogai* 393; Nakkirar in *Aham* 36, 253 and 266; also *Naṟṟiṇai* 358 and perhaps *Neḍunalvāḍai* in the *Paṭṭuppāṭṭu*; Maduraikkaṇakkāyaṉār in *Aham* 338; Māṅguḍi Kiḷār, *Puṟam* 24, 26, 372 and above all the *Maduraikkāñji* of Māṅguḍi Marudan; *Puṟam* 72 is ascribed to the king himself and an excellent piece. *Naṟṟiṇai* 387 and *Aham* 175 may or may not be contemporary references.

c7.11

¹ P. Sundaram Pillai, *Madras Christian College Magazine*, vol. ix, p. 117.

c7.12

² *Puram* 78, ll. 5-6—'பெரியம்பாமே, நம்மிற்ப பொருநனுமினையன், கொண்டியும் பெரிதென.'

c7.13

³ The place is referred to as 'கூகைக்கோழி வாகைப்பறந்தலை' (*Kuruntogai* 393. Pandit R. Rāghava Aiyangār calls it the battle of வாகைப்பறந்தலை. *Ahanānūṟu*, Introd., p. 49. See also *Aham* 253.

c7.14

⁴ *Puram* 24, *Aham* 266. Perhaps Muttūṟrukkūṟram was taken not from Evvi but some one else—*Puram* 24, 11. 20-23. It should be noted however that Evvi is called in this poem மாவேள் and that Muttūṟu is said

c7.15

The other Pāṇdyas of this period may now be more briefly noticed. Some of them may have been only members of the royal family who never ruled as kings—for example, Iḷamperuvaḷudi who died in the sea, the author of *Paripāḍal* No. 15, *Puṟam* 182 and *Naṟṟiṇai* 55 and 56; Nambi Neḍunjeḷiyan (*Puṟam* 239); Pāṇdyan Naḷvaḷudi, the author of *Paripāḍal* 12; Cittiramāḍattu Tuñjiya Nanmāṟan (*Puṟam* 59) and others.¹ Pāṇdyan Aṟivuḍai Nambi, suitably to his name, figures as the author of several wise little poems ² and is the object of a beautiful address by the poet Piśirāndaiyār (*Puṟam* 184) on the economy of moderation in taxation. Another king who is glorified by renowned poets like

c7.16

¹ For the sake of completeness, those omitted in the text may be noted down here.
(1) Aṇḍarmakan Kuṟuvaḷudi, author of *Kuṟuntogai* 345 and *Aham* 150 and 228.
(2) Pāṇdyan Paṉṉāḍutaṉdāṉ *Kuṟuntogai* 270.
(3) ,, Mālaimāṟan ,, 245.
(4) ,, Muḍattirumāṟan *Naṟṟiṇai* 105 (refers to Kuṭṭuvan) and 228.
(5) ,, Māṟan Vaḷudi; author of *Naṟṟiṇai* 97 and 301.
(6) ,, Veḷḷiyambalattu Tuñjiya Peruvaḷudi, *Puṟam* 58.
(7) Karungaioḷvāṭperum Peyar Vaḷudi, *Puṟam* 3.
(8) Pāṇdyan Kiran Sāttaṉ, *Puṟam* 178.
(9) Kūḍakārattu Tuñjiya Māṟan Vaḷudi, *Puṟam* 51 and 52. ² *Kuṟun* 230, *Naṟṟiṇai* 15, *Puṟam* 188, *Aham* 28.

c7.17

to have belonged to தொன்முதிர்வேளிர். Mr. K. V. S. Aiyar's guesses about Yuan Chwang's *Malakūta* being the same as *Miḷalaikkūṟṟam* (*Ancient Dekhan*, pp. 115-22) are not warranted by literary and epigraphic evidence. And at page 120 he surely gives a wrong lead when he says 'this division covered a large area surrounding Madura.'

c7.18

Nakkīrar (*Puram* 55-57) earned for himself the unenviable distinction of being pilloried in song by two poets (*Puram* 196, 198) for his illiberality and his name was Ilavandikaippaḷḷittunjiya Nanmāran. We do not know how the censure was provoked and how far it was justified. Famous as the contemporary of the author of the *Tirukkural*, Ugrapperuvaḷudi proved the strength of his arm by subduing the chieftain of Kanappēr (Kalaiyār-kōil) who had entrenched himself behind a strong fortress in the place.¹ He was a poet himself and is said in tradition to have caused the anthology of the *Ahanānūru* to be made. This king has been sometimes identified, not on quite convincing grounds, with the Neḍunjeḷiyan who expiated on his throne the murder of Kōvalan.² The last king we shall notice in this necessarily disconnected sketch will be Bhūtappāndiyan who took Ollaiyūr and whose queen is well known by her song on the occasion of her *sati*.³ We know little about this king except from his own compositions (*Puram* 71, 246, 247 and *Aham* 25) and these present him as a loving husband who was lucky in the company of his cultured wife and dreaded separation from her, and a prince who valued his friends more than is the rule with princes.

c7.19

¹ *Puram* 21, 367 and the pieces by the king himself viz., *Aham* 26, *Naṟṟiṇai* 98 and *Tiruvaḷḷuvamālai* 4.

c7.20

² Dr. S. K. Aiyangār, *The Augustan Age of Tamil Literature in Ancient India*, pp. 355-6.

c7.21

³ *Puram* 246; see also *Puram* 247, referring to same. Pandit R. Rāghava Aiyangār, *Sen Tamil*, vol. ii, p. 304 points out that Bhūta Pāndyan may be taken to be later than Neḍunjeḷiyan of Talaiyālaṅgānam as he refers to Titiyan who was beaten in that famous battle.

c7.22

The period of these ‘numerous kings’ with their ‘clumsy names and titles’, as Smith found it, is well portrayed in the literature of the age. A careful study of this literature does not however support the view that ‘the Tamils had developed an advanced civilization of their own, wholly independent of Northern India’.¹ Already the three northern religions of Brahminism, Buddhism and Jainism have made their influence felt, and the general conditions of cultured life appear perceptibly Aryanized. Brahmins like Buddhist and Jaina ascetics have come to occupy a distinct place in the social and religious life of the country and the pre-Aryan elements forced into the background.² We have already noticed the early performance of vedic sacrifices by Pāṇdyan kings. On the other hand it is possible that un-Aryan cults attained in Dravidian lands fuller and more independent development or survived in greater force than in the other parts of India more thoroughly colonized by the Aryans. And the line of this development can only be guessed by its survival in some parts, if not the whole, of what is known as Poruḷilakkaṇam, and in references like the Vēlan Āḍal in the Tirumurukārruppaḍai of Nakkīrar and the worship of the Veṭṭuvar described so graphically in canto 12 of the Śilappadikāram. It is remarkable how even in these references to manifestly pre-Aryan deities we are able to trace their progress towards securing good places for themselves in the pantheon of Hinduism. Thus in the Veṭṭuva-vari we see Korravai described as consort of Śiva and the incarnation of Lakṣmi. And Murugan the son of Korravai, is described as the son of six mothers, the captain of the forces of the gods, and the wealth of the Brahmins.¹ Again a poem ( No. 55 ) in the *Puranānūru* contains a beautiful reference to the story of the burning of the Tripura by Śiva and to the shrine of Subrahmanya in Śendil (Tiruccendūr); and the *Āycciyarkuravai* in the *Śilappadikāram* contains songs which embody the whole cycles of Rāma and Kṛṣṇa legends in terms which leave no room for doubt about the general prevalence of the mythology of Brahminical Hinduism in the Tamil land in those days. It has been suggested that stories like those of Kaṇṇappar, Caṇḍēsvarar and Kāraikkāl Ammai may be considered to contain traces of pre-Aryan religious customs. It may be so. And the *Śilappadikāram* and the *Maṇimēkalai* prove unmistakably the prevalence of Jainism and Buddhism side by side with the other cults and this indication receives confirmation, as has already been pointed out, from the early monuments of the Tamil land.

c7.23

¹ V. A. Smith, *Early History*, p. 457. Italics ours. His references to M. Srinivasa Aiyangār and even Kanakasabhai do not seem to support him to the whole length he lets himself go.

c7.24

² Kanakasabhai (p. 56 of his *Tamils*) seems to have exaggerated the exclusiveness and the fewness of the Brahmins in South India in those days. Exact comparisons being impossible, only general impressions can be recorded and I am unable to see that the Brahmins were less numerous then (proportionately to the population) or more exclusive than in recent times.

c7.25

¹ See *Tirumurukārruppaḍai*, ll. 256-65; and Kuṉṟa Kuravai in canto 24 of the *Śilappadikāram*.

c7.26

The form of government was, of course, monarchy. It is not possible to understand the exact import of the ‘five great *Kulus*’ and ‘eight great *Āyams*’ which are often referred to as part of the king’s paraphernalia on ceremonial occasions.² These institutions seem to have been common to the three monarchies of the Tamil land and commentators differ as to their significance. The older annotation makes the five *Kulus* consist of the people (மாசனம்), priests (பார்ப்பார்), physicians (மருத்தர்), astrologers (நிமித்தர்) and ministers (அமைச்சர்) while a later gloss adds commanders, messengers and spies to the ministers and priests (புரோகிதர்) to make the five groups. Likewise there are two explanations given of the ‘eight Āyams’; the earlier one makes them groups of attendants on the king’s person like perfumers, dressing boys, etc.; a later account names more important groups of persons among whom are included the people of the capital city (நகரமாந்தர்) and the leaders of the elephant corps and of the cavalry. One should like to know more about these apparently ceremonial groups of attendants, officials and non-officials, before one accepts Mr. Kanakasabhai’s statement that ‘the council of representatives safeguarded the rights and privileges of the people’.¹ It is well known that the ideals of monarchy laid down in the Kural are of a very high order, and these seem to have been constantly pressed on the monarch’s attention by the numerous poets of the land in the age we are dealing with. Thus one poet (Puram 184) vividly contrasts the effects of moderate taxes which replenish the royal treasury periodically and make the king popular with those of oppressive exactions which impoverish the country and render the king unpopular; and illustrates his meaning by the difference in the cost of feeding an elephant from a barn and of letting him roam freely over fields ripe for the harvest. Another (Puram 55) stresses the need for impartiality in the king’s justice, and valour, grace and liberality in his conduct in terms that deserve to be quoted in the original.

c7.27

² See Index ஐம்பெருங்குழு and எண்போயம் in Pandit Swāminātha Aiyar's editions of the *Śilappadikāram* and the *Maṇimēkalai*.

c7.28

¹ See his Tamils, p. 109.

c7.29

THE PĀNDYAN KINGDOM

c7.30

அறநெறி முதற்றே யரசின் கொற்ற
மதனால், நமரெனக் கோல்கோடாது
பிறரெனக் குணங் கொல்லாது
ஞாயிற் றன்ன வெந்திற லாண்மையுந்
திங்க ளன்ன தண்பெருஞ் சாயலும்
வானத் தன்ன வண்மையு மூன்று
முடை யை யாகி . . . . .
நீடூ வாழிய நெடுந்தகை.

c7.31

It is more interesting to notice the reference in the *Śilappadikāram* (canto 17, l. 7) to the supply of *ghi* to the king’s household in Madura in terms which remind us of Megasthenes’ statement that one village should each day bring to the treasury the royal tribute, which was apparently a tribute in kind, consisting of provisions for the daily consumption of the royal household.

c7.32

Social life especially in cities like Madura had attained a high degree of refinement as could be seen from the literature of the age. It may be noted in passing that this literature was not always the work of poets who pursued poetry for its own sake. Minstrelsy was a profession, and the roving bards of the time were often not easy to satisfy, and sometimes exceedingly sensitive. We have already noted instances of princes penalized by the scarcely veiled imprecations of poets who felt they had not been hospitably treated. A song in the *Puranānūru* contains a rather humble description of these organized bands of mendicants—some of them poets of real merit, some of them musicians with all kinds of quaint instruments, who moved about, with bands of female singers and dancers, from one little fortress to another, where their advent formed one of the few distractions of life for the chieftain, alternating with his hunting expeditions and warlike raids.¹ These chieftains were not always models of courtesy or liberality, and some of them must have deserved the censures they provoked.

c7.33

¹ *Puram* 47 and Selections from G. U. Pope in *Tam. Ant.*, i, 6, p. 68.

c7.34

The *Maduraikkāñji* which is a long poem of nearly 800 lines contain many little pen-pictures of great interest to the student of the social life of the age. We cannot do more than draw attention to a few of these here. The descriptions of fights and fortifications (e.g. ll. 64-7) show evidence of a fairly advanced stage in the art of warfare. It is interesting that the Parathavar are mentioned as specially noted for their heroism in war (ll. 139-144) and they perhaps supplied good recruits to Neḍuñjeḷiyan’s forces. The account given of the port of Śaliyūr (in ll. 75-88) and its commercial activity strongly reminds us of similar accounts in the *Periplus* and of the mention of Yavana guards in the fortress of Madura in the *Śilappadikāram* and the frequent references to the use of imported foreign wines by kings and chieftains.² Korkai is referred to as the centre of pearl fishing (ll. 131-8). The long description of Madura with her ditch, walls and gateways, her crowded bazaars more than usually busy on a festival day, her temples and her debating halls defies reproduction and is best enjoyed in the original. Courtesans played an important part in social life and were then, as in later days, the custodians of the arts of music and dancing (ll. 570-83). But family life is also depicted at its best in a tender sketch of the daily routine of matronly duties which shows few traits that cannot be recognized in family life at the present day. And the contrast between the gay and voluptuous courtesan and the faithful and loving wife cannot be better drawn than in the portraiture of Mādhavi and Kaṇṇaki in the Śilappadikāram. Some women were also known as poets while others followed a life of religious seclusion. Brahmins chanted the Vedas early in the morning and the musicians practised on their favourite instruments much as they do now.

c7.35

² Yavanas in *Śilappadikāram*, xiv, ll. 66-7 with which cf. *Mullaippāṭṭu*, ll. 59-66; for foreign wines see *Puram* 56, ll. 18-21.

c7.36

There is no doubt that many of these pictures are drawn by the poets of the age in obedience to literary convention; but such convention must have been reared on a fairly solid foundation in the facts of contemporary life. In this brief sketch, our attention has been given mainly to a part of this literature that can be definitely referred to the Pāndya country. But the unity of Tamil life in the three kingdoms and the many principalities can only be realized by a more extensive study which cannot be undertaken here.¹

c7.37

¹ Still the best sketch is that of Kanakasabhai, *The Tamils*, ch. ix, but it is high time that another account which will keep more in touch with the sources of our information is attempted. There is scope for a good monograph on the subject.

c7.38

There appears to be no means at present of fixing the chronology of the Śangam age more exactly than we have sought to do so far. We are in the dark as to when and how the period came to a close. The data that have been gathered together from the Śangam literature may, one may venture to suggest, carry us to about the middle of the third century A.D. or perhaps a little later. When next the curtain rises, it is on a scene that belongs to the middle or even the end of the sixth century A.D. We thus seem to have in between these two periods, a veritable dark age of about three centuries of which we know nothing at present. Even the contemporary Pallava history of the age, into which we get some glimpses from various sources, seems to throw little light on the history of the extreme south.

Linked texts (10)